Guest post by Toaf
It seems that Bolt and Blair have noticed the global issue that everyone else has been talking about for a while: rising food prices. Maybe they have been posting on this topic for months now (I honestly don’t know). My guess is that they just learned about it from their co-thinker, Mark Steyn.
That’s right, it’s a Steyn-Blair-Bolt groupthink ménage à trois! So what does this esteemed group of independent thinkers have to say about the global food crisis? Do they have policy suggestions for governments and global institutions? Insights into the systemic causes of food insecurity in vulnerable communities in the developing world? Anything new to offer at all?
You’re dreamin’.
Bolt’s effort is to post photos of Indian actresses. He then characterises the issue as “the latest eco-panic” (whatever that means) and tells his readers that “green policies”, among other things, are to blame for rising food prices.
Later, Blair (by way of a Steyn quote, rather than his own words) suggests that it is biofuel-loving lefties who are to blame. No mention of other causal factors there.
Then Bolt returns to the issue, also quoting the same Steyn piece. No mention of the other factors he alluded to earlier. His heading reads, “Save the planet; starve an African”. (All vulnerable people are Africans, you see?) And his commenters take the bait:
Brilliant. Hear that lefties? You’re religion is killing people. YOU are killing people. Why? So you can feel good about yourselves. So you can be a good ‘eco-citizen’…
MattR of Melbourne
So there you have it. As far as our leading right-wing bloggers are concerned, all you need to know about the global food crisis is that lefties and green policies are to blame. And in the unlikely event that Today Tonight shows some video footage of a food riot in some developing nation African country, you’ll know exactly where to point the finger.
42 Comments
29 April, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Maybe they need FOOD SCARCITY as a new topic to get their teeth into…
The climate thing is getting old and even the nutters now are looking embarassed, or would if they had any sense of reality.
29 April, 2008 at 11:16 pm
So what about the creation of millions and millions of new middle class Indians and Chinese.
Might they have something to do with it to?
Then again that would take level headed logical reasoning.
29 April, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Mao, to be fair to Bolt he does mention that factor in his early post. Blair and Steyn don’t, and Bolt doesn’t mention it in his second post, which is just a cut-and-paste nudge-and-wink of Steyn’s piece.
29 April, 2008 at 11:42 pm
Yeah, I hate to agree with them but biofuels are a causational factor in food price rises.
But then so is increased urbanisation (less farmers), arable land being used for other things (less land to grow stuff on), changing rainfall patterns due to global warming (you know, the thing they don’t believe in), increasing population fighting over resources, as noted by others more middle class people means greater food intake and preferance for foods that are no enviro friendly (eg beef over chicken/pork) etc. It’s a perfect storm as have many have pointed out.
Serious climate change campaigners have noted the issues with biofuel which is why less use of oil is the main thrust of where they are going as opposed to destroying forests (carbon increase) to plant crops (slight decrease) which then get processed and burnt (um… increase).
Blame the farm lobby in the US that have latched onto biolfuels with fervour and saw their food corn greenwashed into legally mandated fuel addatives and the value of their crops soar.
Rice is the major issue of course which is not affected by the biofuel debate as much and is far more due to climate issues, lack of farmers, and land being used for things other than growing rice.
Of course you can’t examine a complex issue like this in under 200 words when you’re a logic challenged fuckhole.
30 April, 2008 at 7:28 am
Mikey: “Blame the farm lobby in the US that have latched onto biolfuels with fervour…”
Which is the point that Bolt-Blair-Steyn are missing. It is business – the farm and energy lobbies – who have pushed biofuel in a big way.
Calling the shift to biofuel production a “green policy” is a way of placing the blame on environmentalists (and by association, all “lefties”) instead of industry – those damn greenies made us give subsidies to farmers! Yet in reality there are many groups on the left (particularly in the Americas) who have opposed large-scale biofuel from the outset.
Does anyone remember Fidel Castro calling subsidised biofuel production a slow genocide against the world’s poor? A year later, some within the UN are saying the same thing, and in equally forceful language.
30 April, 2008 at 9:10 am
The food is only scarce if you can’t afford it, which under capitalism is the same thing really. In a rational society based on production for human need…
30 April, 2008 at 9:27 am
None of the Bolt bloggers know what to say when you point out that Aust ethanol is made from Sugar Cane and is far more efficient than making it from Corn – like what is done in the USA.
That whole claim about a tank of gas consuming a years supply of corn falls flat. US farm subsidies have made growing corn in the US cheaper than growing corn in nations like Mexico, destroying the Mexican corn farming industry.
The the Bolt bloggers wont attack their buddy George W. for this policy.
btw 3rd generation biofuels seem to provide a solution to the problem. Sucha s the research being done at several Australian universities.
30 April, 2008 at 1:39 pm
It’s hilarious that Bolt etc. blames lefty eco-warriors for causing so much that ills the world on the one hand, yet on the other derides them for being loony, disorganised, rabble halfwits.
Wow, they have more power to change things than the governments of the world.
Hey, isn’t that called ANARCHY??!!!
ARRGGH!! EVERYBODY RUN!!? THE LUNATICS HAVE TAKEN OVER!!? WE’RE ALL GONNA BE TURNED INTO SOYLENT GREEN!!?!
30 April, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Slightly OT: You’d thing that B1 and B2 would be just a little tired of their little AGW game by now wouldn’t you? You know, the one where they highlight a cold snap or some rainfall somewhere and then all their sycophants and hangers-on pile on with a repeat of the same old lines, smears and idiocy. Keeps them amused I guess…
30 April, 2008 at 3:03 pm
It’s so sad, so juvenile isn’t it. I’d love to know what Bolt’s kids thought of some of his more tongue-poking stuff if they saw it. As for Blair, it’s his weapon of choice isn’t it?
30 April, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Suburban marxist should know all about food shortages given the countries here and past s/he has an affinity towards. They all solved that problem diddn’t they – wait – they weren’t truly socialist countries you say?
30 April, 2008 at 5:38 pm
windrider,
Thanks for your comment during my little chat with Peter K. Anderson. I’ve had a bit of a read of his blog. Hmm.
I didn’t really expect any sensible discussion from him, I just couldn’t believe the other people there were taking him seriously. He writes long, rambling, incoherent posts, with eccentric grammar and strange use of emphasis. His logic is full of non-sequiters and when challenged all he can do is repeat his initial assertion ad nauseum. But he uses big long words and doesn’t believe in AGW – so he must be an expert. When you’re desperate you take what you can get, I suppose.
30 April, 2008 at 5:47 pm
“…wait – they weren’t truly socialist countries you say?”
Why Michael, you’re very perceptive! Thank you for saving me the effort of having to say it myself.
:-)
30 April, 2008 at 7:08 pm
ChrisK NP
A few people can get wound up and sometimes the level of insults can get to you on Boltblog.
The reason I post on Boltblog is that all the trolls on the News Limited websites seem to nest there and build up their repetiore. I try an restict myself to Global warming topics.
30 April, 2008 at 7:12 pm
I no longer have the words to describe the astonishing level of hypocrisy and idiocy of Bolt, Blair et al. Being more familiar with Bolt, and not wanting to spend any time amongst those disgusting racist pigs at Blair’s site, who represent even more extreme nut-bags than Boltists, I can only ask what it is that this guy does?
His accusations of the group-thinking of others, are made only more absurd when you realise that most of his “work”, involves lifting quotes and arguments from other people. After trawling through the internet for hours on end. When you look at the content posted by morons like Bolt, Blair, Akerman, Steyn et al, you can see that all of their sites basically pump out identical stuff on a daily basis, with varying levels of idiocy and vitriol. What is this psychological phenomenon that leads people who are the most guilty of a certain vice, the first to accuse others of being so? – Boltism? right-idiocy? Personality disorder?
30 April, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Oh and Good old “Matt R” hey. Although virtually all Bolt followers are afflicted by a certain level of nut-baggery, blind-ness and juvenile idiocy, this affliction does occur in grades of severity. Some of those that I would nominated to be in the top tier and I don’t know the degree to which different pseudonyms are utilised over there, would have to be Matt R, Cohenite, GC, the former Dan-W whoever he is now, curious, “worried”, “alan of sydeny”, Tim Blair and a few more.
Second tier Bolt himself, mark of cnberra ( just making it posting something of balance once recently) though still an utter moron and best suited to the top group, kiwi (the former Greg Williams), Leonie (same story as mark of cnberra) “watty” and a few more.
Below that are tiers that include people blind by ideological servitude and Bolt following, but less idiotic and vocal as the top two tiers, then people almost completely biased and blind but capable of rare balance and intelligent argument, and then some conservatives who generally support Bolt’s arguments, but can argue rationally and intelligently.
Tiers below the top two too three are, in varying degrees, capable of citing Bolt when he post something particularly stupid or offensive, and tend to avoid extreme positions. The last group of people are those whom I generally disagree with, but can still respect for generally being rational and arguing with a level of intelligence and independent thought- like most of the people of general conservative disposition, that I have associations with. Unfortunately they are in the vast minority at Bolt’s site, with only slightly more numbers than progressives.
30 April, 2008 at 8:05 pm
surburbian marxist… heh heh ha. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
cheers.
Lets just keep trying – no rush, plenty of people still alive too.
1 May, 2008 at 8:29 am
No worries Michael. And i can see that, with peace and prosperity spreading through the Middle East, a world of plenty for the formerly starving billions of the Third World, an an environmentally stable future that, well,…I’d have to be just crazy to try and work for something better!
1 May, 2008 at 10:24 am
Michael, your ability to mount an argument is breath-taking.
1 May, 2008 at 3:44 pm
sorry to disappoint you damian, but i’m too busy burning rubber in my fuel-guzzling land rover
to really care and – oh im sorry, marxist was preaching…
1 May, 2008 at 5:46 pm
Chris of Bris, what a sad sad case you are mate. You spend all your time trawling blogs you don’t like so you can comment on them on another blog. That my friend is the definition of a parasite. You owe everything to Bolt and Blair mate, without them you’d have nothing to do and nothing to talk about. What an important part of your life they are. Almost like your parents. And you are like an adolescent rebelling against them without reason or logic just blind instinctive rebellion. When you grow out of this phase mate (most do) and you leave all of your socialist save the planet self-indulgent adolescent political views behind, keep this post as a reminder of your own childish stupidity.
1 May, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Add Circle Jerk to the top tier of juvenile imbecile, displaying all the empty-throw away lines, baseless assumptions and insults, and lack of ability to engage in adult discussion on individual issues, which form the hallmarks of a Boltist/right-idiot.
Infact fool, I rarely post on Bolt’s blog now, and never have at the openly racist Blair site, though I am still stunned at the level of immaturity and idiocy on show by some of my fellow Australians who are regular visitors to these sites. The limited amount of time that I would devote to discussing politics outside of study, I prefer to do so with people with of maturity, balance, rationality and intelligence, and usually not with opinion columnists of any persuasion. I usually avoid individuals without the above abilities, and those who harbour extremist views or whom have a penchant for juvenile blurting.
An no fool I am not “an adolescent rebelling with blind instinctive rebellion” as I often criticise editors not part of Bolt’s group-thinking clique, but regularly those seen by most of the populace as more of the ‘left’ than the ‘right’, including the arguments put forwarded by Jeremy on this and other sites of his. In doing so I usually can respect such editors for providing intelligence, knowledge and measured analysis in formulating their arguments, instead of just stupid, useless and juvenile generalisations and mantras about the ‘left’ and ‘right’, which forms the backbone of the contributions made by idiots like Bolt and his mindless drones. I have also at times praised Bolt, for rare moments of intelligence.
Ah and then fool you provide the typical Boltist/right-idiot statement about me being a Socialist, greeny or eco-warrior, showcasing your true right-idiot credentials through your assumption that one has to be some big ‘lefty’ to see how useless, misleading and pathetic Andrew Bolt’s form of ‘journalism’ actually is. Grow up and pull your head in fool. Its your ilk that prevents an argument and discussion being judged on its own merits for quality and critical thinking, as you’re are so blind by ideological servitude that you have no ability for independent thought.
1 May, 2008 at 8:52 pm
*claps* Good comeback, Chris!
1 May, 2008 at 9:02 pm
Circle Jerk. Feel to put forward an argument, clarify a point, explain your position and seek to persuade others. Oh, and try to have a point when you post.
What you posted was just a mess of silly insults. That’s why Chris smacked you on the nose with a rolled up newspaper.
Remember, this is not Bolty’s site where a mindless, flippant cliche attacking socialists or environmentalists will dog whistle up a pack of slavvering half wits (who don’t give a bugger about anyone else in the world) to chant slogans in support of you.
1 May, 2008 at 9:43 pm
If its any consolation, mate you are just a product of the education system and the bias media you are subjected too. Don’t feel too bad though, whilst your group-thinking mates applaud, even you know you are just reacting emotionally. That’s what happens when you don’t have the ability to logically construct an argument.
And as for arguing a point – what point were you arguing by throwing juvenile insults at various contributors to Bolta’s blog? Is that your idea of a discussion with people of maturity, balance, rationality and intelligence. Attacking individuals behind their back? What a big man you are! So mature!
Mate, it is you who are indoctrinated in ideology. It is you who haunt blogs who you know offer opinion that differs from your staunchly held belief system only to bitch about the fact they think different to you. You are so blind you are unable to see how pathetic that is.
And don’t be mistaken for thinking I am defending Bolt’s crew. Ultra-conservative religious types are just as irrational as you. I would have thought you would get along with them well, what with your canny ability to plug people into holes so quickly and your extreme gullibility to believe what ever is whispered in your ear.
Like the spoiled brat you are mate, here’s your dummy, put it back in your mouth and keep talking to your nodding group-think mates. No more from me. Enjoy your circle jerk fella.
2 May, 2008 at 12:49 am
I actually found Circle Jerk’s second post quite humorous. He reminded me of the Hannibal Lecture character in Silence of the Lambs who regularly indulges in lengthy monologues, patronisingly analysing the mental machinations of others, whilst being embued with a self-perceived superior insight to others. The creepy thing about lector’s character was he often hit the nail on the head and got under the skin of the target.
Perhaps CircleJerk has been watching too many psychiatric movies, perhaps his delusions of grandiose intellectual insight, and perceived immunity from the irrationality affecting the majority of the world, are brought about by his involvement in some sort of wacky cult, whose followers believe that their eclectic mixture of wacky ideas and paranoias, alone represent the sole voice of reason in a world of madness. Perhaps he is just a complete and utter tool. Perhaps all of the above.
I mean only a complete and utter tool would accuse someone of failing to have the ability to “logically construct an argument” when they themselves label someone as a “Socialist with save the planet self-indulgent adolescent political views” , without their target presenting their own political views, rather simply criticising non thinking childish idiots, whose slavish attachment to a certain ideology and ignorant understanding of terms that they brandish about, automatically makes them oppose things like Socialist influences and environmental protection, and insult others who are influenced by such ideas. Logical fallacy fool. Just because I oppose one thing or person, doesn’t mean that I, therefore must support the opposite.
I guess I’m just mad though, being brainwashed throughout my life by education systems, both public and private, which have been corrupted by Socialist mind control programs, and the Australian media, which despite being owned by corporate conglomerates and super-rich individual capitalists, have joined in the Socialist, eco-fanatical brain-washing propaganda machine, removing my ability to think rationally like Jerk, who with his tin-foil hat, has remained immune to this phenomena.
2 May, 2008 at 12:52 am
Oh and Jerk, I do criticise the people mentioned in my eariler posts as being prize-idiots, and directly expost to them what morons they are. The thing is, Bolt’s moderator monkeys inhibit your ability to do so, and because most are beyond saving, and useless wasting any more time on.
2 May, 2008 at 6:57 am
How cute.
Bolta has a little tanty about the fact that the clique of conservative poltroons who were courted by the former government no longer have any influence:
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/column_confessions_of_the_great_censor/
It’s nice that he mocks Marr’s allegations of censorship under the Howard regime, whilst neglecting to mention his own role in say, smearing Andrew Wilkie, or being flown by Downer into Iraq. To say nothing of all the other News Ltd columnists (Albrechtson, Saluszinsky, Milne, Sheridan) with ties to the Howard faithful that are sufficiently close to be unseemly.
2 May, 2008 at 7:01 am
He seems to have a case of the stoopids today. Men are apparently more rational than women. His columns don’t exactly provide solid empirical evidence for that assertion:
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/ours_earthed/#commentsmore
Charmingly, some poor lass has agreed with him. If she were Jewish, Bolt would call her ’self-hating’. Anyhow, Ms Wonder of Hurstbridge says:
Women are more gullible and believe what the media tell them. Most of the women I know are into ‘saving the planet’ crap.
You tell it, sister. Hear that, Islamecofemdemonazis? Pull your socks up.
2 May, 2008 at 8:55 am
Hey, Chris of Brisbane. Do you see the irony in posting a lengthy monologue alleging someone else posts lengthy monologues?
Of course for someone who starts a post with saying they “no longer have the words to describe the astonishing level of hypocrisy and idiocy of Bolt, Blair et al” and then doing just that – perhaps you are immune to irony.
To cap it off, you say “[a]dd Circle Jerk to the top tier of juvenile imbecile, displaying all the empty-throw away lines, baseless assumptions and insults…” which is, of course, a baseless assumption and insult.
Do you really type what you think, or are you just indulging in performance art?
2 May, 2008 at 9:06 am
Chris, take a break and a walk for a while, your going to blow an egalitarian fuse.
Now that your back,
“….and insult others who are influenced by such ideas. Logical fallacy fool.”
Thank you for placing those two sentences together – in your dysfunctional, neurotic, emotional reaction to circeljerk you probably diddn’t realise that you’d just made a complete hypocrite of yourself.
2 May, 2008 at 10:52 am
Im amazed at how Bolt never tires of the same old climate change rubbish. He starts of with a cold day somewhere = global waming is over and then all hell breaks loose. Sensible comments get lost in a wave of abuse from his attack dogs, people like Janine and DanRwho have facts to back their arguments up get pounced on with idiot replies from the usual suspects Jay Santos, Hartlod or Faustus, and then it starts all over again. Odd really that the punters keep coming back.
2 May, 2008 at 11:21 am
Amazed – what you will find is that there are only a few who keep on persisting within the blogs.
More civilised and reasoned arguments get lost in the trash so posters become tired of having the same arguments over and over with the same monkeys. Most of the posters in here would testify to growing tired of it.
Even today he is claiming to be all mighty in his column about censorship (no doubt one of the main contributors here is on to it)
2 May, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Amazed: Sensible comments get lost in a wave of abuse from his attack dogs, people like Janine and DanR who have facts to back their arguments up get pounced on with idiot replies from the usual suspects Jay Santos, Hartlod or Faustus, and then it starts all over again. Odd really that the punters keep coming back.
Stupidity is magnified in these sheltered workshops. Censorship and a one-sided audience mean that idiocy is not effectively challenged. Instead the pack is led by the most hard-core apparatchiks trying to outdo each other with their macho klansmanship.
The other participants, like the retarded camp-followers in the movie “Bob Roberts”, learn to mouth the half-understood party line while huddling together in the nether regions of their sad swamp where the sunlight of reason does not shine. They have long ago accepted the consolations of tribal loyalty as absolving them from doing that which they find most difficult – thinking for themselves.
2 May, 2008 at 8:23 pm
People, I am seeking guidance. I am a newbie at this blogging thing, and I have come across Bolt’s site because I am interested in discussing some of the issues he specialises in (particularly the politics of new government, social change and the rational use of resources). However Bolt’s nakedly commercial approach to controversy (he is obviously a wannabe Internet Shock Jock) and some of the contributors’ contributions revolt me.
I have even more recently come across this site and I have noticed it seems to be populated by sensible contributors tuned to a human wavelength.
My question is this: does this site discuss the alternative side to Bolt’s postings, or is it specifically aimed at discussing and holding the blow torch to his offering? If it is the latter, I will tip my hat to you all and move on, because I don’t have the time, or stomach, to join in.
3 May, 2008 at 9:27 pm
My question is this: does this site discuss the alternative side to Bolt’s postings, or is it specifically aimed at discussing and holding the blow torch to his offering?
A little bit of both, I would think. I’m certainly not aware of any ban against pro-Bolt comments, or ‘third-way’ opinion-holders.
3 May, 2008 at 9:44 pm
To be fair, I’d have to say that this site, like MrLefty’s BoltWatch is predominantly concerned with discussing those aspect of the B’s output that are perceived to be repugnant to “us”. That’s not to say that the Bs don’t occasionally have rational and reasonable points to make – it’s just that, this site has no need to discuss those – I’m sure the Bs will be only too glad to accept positive feedback to their own sites. All egos love to be massaged – especially the big ones.
Whether they want to believe it or not, both Bs practice a form of group think and moderation that excludes much criticism of their output. Hence the reason for this site and the forerunner. No apoligies should be offered or are necessary for this.
3 May, 2008 at 9:48 pm
No apologies should be offered either.
6 May, 2008 at 6:02 pm
I agree with Chris of Brisbane about that “Cohenite” contributer. He once tried to claim that the show “The Office” was a satire of the Left!
Iwould have to add Infidel Tiger to the top tier as well.
and to the fucktards Michael and Circl Jerk, accusing people of “bitching behind” their targets back or whatever, the reason people come here is that Bolt’s monkeys tend not to post logical arguments against his minions clearly we get sick of wasting our time on dumb fucks like you too.
Im interested to know what exactly Michaels point on Marxism and not really socialist is?” It doesn’t take much effort to insult someone for their view without explaining what about their view is wrong (in this case Marxism), maybe you could explain the fundamental flaws for us Michael?
6 May, 2008 at 9:13 pm
Yes it seems those fucktards over in Bolt’s cave try to outdo each other, to be the most radically idiotic. Although I think they often switch pseudonyms as well. Probably on the rare occasion that Bolt’s cowardly moderators allow someone to show them up for the utter imbeciles that they are, and shoot their juvenile bleating too pieces. Cohenite seems to be pushing to the front of the pack, to be the loudest, most vocal, extreme nut-bag over there recently.
16 May, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Chris of Brisbane
“When you look at the content posted by morons like Bolt, Blair, Akerman, Steyn et al, you can see that all of their sites basically pump out identical stuff on a daily basis”
Why does this statement remind me of er, YOU?
16 May, 2008 at 2:53 pm
EvShow
“Im interested to know what exactly Michaels point on Marxism and not really socialist is?”
While I am not Michael, I can tell you what he meant.
Today’s Socialists-Marxists maintain, that the only reason socialism never worked as intended, because it wasn’t carried out properly, ie. it was somehow “corrupted”, but give “us” a chance we will do it properly this time!
Comments are closed.